Phonetics and Speech Sciences (말소리와 음성과학)

Korean Society of Speech Sciences (한국음성학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Aerodynamic Characteristics, Vocal Efficiency, and Closed Quotient Differences according to Fundamental Frequency Fixation

음도 고정 유무에 따른 공기역학, 음성효율성 및 성대접촉률 차이

  • 김재옥 (강남대학교 교육대학원 언어치료교육전공)
  • Received : 2013.01.10
  • Accepted : 2013.03.23
  • Published : 2013.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The aerodynamic characteristics (subglottal pressure (Ps) and mean airflow rate (MFR)), fundamental frequency (Fo), intensity (I), vocal efficiency (VE), and closed quotient (CQ) were compared during a sustained vowel /o/ sound under three conditions: in a comfortable loudness and pitch level (condition 1), in a maximum loudness level with a fixed pitch (condition 2), and in a maximum loudness level without a fixed pitch (condition 3). Also, multiple regression analyses were done to measure the aerodynamic characteristics affect on the VE and the CQ in each condition. The results showed the Fo, Ps, MFR, VE, and CQ increased as I increased with and without fixed pitch. Most notably, VE in condition 3 was the highest of all the conditions, but CQ was not very high. By the results of multiple regression analysis, VE was significantly affected by I and Ps in all conditions; Fo was the other main key for affecting VE in high pitch. However, none of the aerodynamic characteristics significantly affected CQ. As I increases, Fo should be increased by increasing Ps and VE. Therefore, researchers should consider and specify an a priori to Fo, Ps, and I when measuring VE to examine the complex and delicate vocal mechanism.

Keywords

References

  1. Tang, J., & Stathopoulos, E. T. (1995). Vocal efficiency as a function of vocal intensity: A study o f children, women, and men. Journal of Acoustic Society of America 97, 1885-1982. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.412062
  2. Jiang, J., Stern, J., Chen, H., & Solomon, N. P. (2004). Vocal efficiency measurements in subjects with vocal polyps and nodules: A preliminary report. The Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and Laryngology 113, 277-282. https://doi.org/10.1177/000348940411300404
  3. Titze, I. R. (1992). Vocal efficiency. Journal of Voice 6, 135-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-1997(05)80127-4
  4. Agresti, A. & Finlay, B. (1999). Statistical methods for the social sciences. 3rd ed. Prentice Hall: NJ.
  5. Grillo, E. U. & Verdolini, K. (2008). Evidence for distinguishing pressed, normal, resonant, and breathy voice qualities by laryngeal resistance and vocal efficiency in vocally trained subjects. Journal of Voice 21(5), 546-552.
  6. Titze, I. R. (1989). Physiologic and acoustic differences between male and female voices. Journal of Acoustic Society of America 85, 1699-1707. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.397959
  7. Hillman, R. E., Holmberg, E. B., Perkell, J. S., Walsh, M., & Vaughan, C. (1989). Objective assessment of vocal hyperfunction: an experimental framework and initial results. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 32, 373-392. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3202.373
  8. Titze I. R. & Sundberg J. (1992). Vocal intensity in speakers and singers. Journal of Acoustic Society of America 91, 2936-2946. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.402929
  9. Brockmann, M., Storck, C. , Carding, P. N., Drinnan, M. J. (2008). Voice loudness and gender effects on jitter and shimmer in healthy adults. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 51, 1152-1160. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2008/06-0208)
  10. Homberg, E. B., Hillman, R. E., Perkell, J. S. (1988). Glottal airflow and transglottal air pressure measurements for male and female speaker in soft, normal, and loud voice. Journal of Acoustic Society of America 84, 511-529. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.396829
  11. Sundberg, J., Titze, I., Scherer, R. (1993). Phonatory control in male singing: a study of the effects of subglottal pressure, fundamental frequency, and mode of phonation on the voice source. Journal of Voice 7, 15-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-1997(05)80108-0
  12. Choi, S. H., Nam, D. H., Kim, D. W., Kim, Y. H., Choi, H. S. (2006). Characteristics of Phonatory and Respiratory Control on Pitch, Loudness, Register Change in Untrained and Trained Singers. The Journal of the Korean Society of Logopedics and Phoniatrics 17(2), 115-126. (최성희, 남도현, 김덕원, 김영호, 최홍식 (2006). 성악가와 훈 련받지 않은 일반인의 음도, 강도, 성구변화 시 발성 및 호흡조절 특성. 대한음성언어의학회지 17(2), 115-126.)
  13. Jung, S. M. (1998). Vocal efficiency measures in classically trained western singers. The Journal of the Korean Society of Logopedics and Phoniatrics 9, 43-46. (정성민 (1998). 서양음악을 전공으로 하는 성악인에서의 음 성효율 측정. 대한음성언어의학회지 9호, 43-46.)
  14. Sulter, A. M. & Wit, H. P. (1996). Glottal volume velocity waveform characteristics in subjects with and without vocal training, related to gender, sound intensity, fundamental frequency, and age. Journal of Acoustic Society of America 100(5), 3360-3373. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.416977
  15. Berke, G. S., Hanson, D. G., Gerratt, B. R., Trapp, T. K., Macagba, C., & Natividad, M. (1990). The effect of air flow and medial adductory compression on vocal efficiency and glottal vibration. Otolaryngology-Head Neck Surgery 102(3), 212-218. https://doi.org/10.1177/019459989010200302
  16. Pederson, M. F. (1977). Electroglottography compared with synchronized stroboscopy in normal person. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica 29, 191-219. https://doi.org/10.1159/000264088
  17. Agresti, A. & Binlay, B. (1999). Statistical methods for the social sciences, 3rd ed. NJ: Prentice Hall.
  18. Plant, R. L. & Younger, R. M. (2000). The interrelationship of subglottic air pressure, fundamental frequency, and vocal intensity during speech. Journal of Voice 14(2), 170-177. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-1997(00)80024-7
  19. Titze, I. (1989). On the relation between subglottal pressure and fundamental frequency in phonation. Journal of Acoustic Society of America 85(2), 901-906. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.397562
  20. Sundberg, J., Titze, I., & Sherer, R. (1993). Phonatory control in male singing: a study of the effects of subglottal pressure, fundamental frequency, and mode of phonation on the voice source. Journal of Voice 7, 15-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-1997(05)80108-0
  21. Sundberg, J., Andersson, M. & Hultqvist, C. (1999). Effects of subglottal pressure variation on professional baritone singers' voice sources. Journal of Acoustic Society of America 105(3), 1965-1971. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.426731
  22. Nam, D. H., Paik, J. Y., Kim, J. O., Park, S. Y., & Choi, H. S. (2007). Changes in aerodynamic function and closed quotient with the variable pitch and loudness in male classic singers. Speech Sciences 14(2), 23-33. (남도현, 백재연, 김재옥, 박선영, 최홍식 (2007). 남성 성악가 의 음도고정시 강도 변화와 강도고정시 음도 변화의 공기역 학 및 성대접촉율의 변화. 음성과학 14(2), 23-33.)
  23. Jin, Y., Pyo, H. W., & Choi, H. (1996). Evaluation of vocal efficiency for the polyps and nodules. The Journal of the Korean Society of Logopedics and Phoniatrics 7(1), 56-60. (진용대, 표화영, 최홍식 (1996). Evaluation of vocal efficiency for the polyps and nodules. 대한음성언어의학회지 7(1), 56-60.)
  24. Higgins, M. B. & Saxman, J. H. (1991). A comparison of selected phonatory behaviors of healthy aged and young adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 34, 1000-1010. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3405.1000
  25. Orlikoff, R. F. (1991). Assessment of the dynamics of vocal fold contact from the electroglottogram: Data from normal male subjects. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 34, 1066-1072. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3405.1066
  26. Sapienza, C. M., Stathopoulos, E. T., & Dromey, C. (1998). Approximation of open quotient and speed quotient from glottal airflow and EGG waveforms: Effects of measurement criteria and sound pressure level. Journal of Voice 12(1), 31-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-1997(98)80073-8
  27. Sundberg. J. & Högset, C. (2001). Voice source differences between falsetto and modal registers in counter tenors and baritones. Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology 26, 26-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/140154301300109107

Cited by

  1. Aerodynamic features in patients with vocal polyps before & after laryngomicrosurgery vol.8, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.13064/KSSS.2016.8.3.039
  2. Comparison of Aerodynamic Variables according to the Execution Methods of KayPENTAX Phonatory Aerodynamic System Model 6600 vol.7, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.13064/KSSS.2015.7.4.093